Wakilii

Ndyamijuka Robert v Uganda (Misc. Criminal Application No. 52 of 1992)

High Court · [1992] UGHC 118 · 1992 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for release on bail pending trial for murder after committal to High Court
Decision
Applicant released on bail pending trial subject to specified conditions

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

Held that bail was granted to the applicant accused of murder who had been committed for trial and held on remand. The court found exceptional circumstances in the applicant's grave illness (ulcers requiring special dietary treatment) which could not be adequately treated in custody. The applicant satisfied the court that he would not abscond, having complied with previous bail conditions for eight years, having a fixed place of abode, and presenting credible sureties.

Outcome

Applicant released on bail pending trial subject to specified conditions

Facts

The applicant, Police Constable Robert Ndyamijuka No. 14567, was accused of murder contrary to section 183 of the Penal Code allegedly committed in 1983. He was first arrested in 1983 and released on bail in 1984 on medical grounds (ulcers). He complied with bail conditions for eight years. In March 1992 he was re-arrested and committed to the High Court for trial. He had been on remand for six months with no trial date fixed. The applicant suffered from ulcers requiring feeding at least four times daily, which he could not obtain in prison. He had received limited medical treatment in custody (only two panadols despite prescriptions in June and August 1992). He had a fixed place of abode in Bukoto, Kampala where he had lived for over eight years. He was married with four children (his wife and youngest child had died the previous year). He presented two sureties: his brother Benon Mugisha (employed by Uganda Railways Corporation) and Benedicto Kasule (Assistant Council Agent and businessman).

Issues

  1. Whether exceptional circumstances exist justifying the applicant's release on bail under section 14A of the Trial on Indictments (Amendment) Act 1985.
  2. Whether the applicant is likely to abscond if released on bail.

Orders

  • Bail granted to the applicant.
  • Applicant to deposit cash of UGX 300,000 with the court.
  • Sureties Benon Mugisha and Benedicto Kasule each to sign a bond of UGX 3,000,000 (not cash).
  • Applicant to report to the Assistant Registrar (Crime) High Court every Friday starting 18 September 1992 until final disposal of the case or until further order.

Rules and key headnotes

Bail — Exceptional Circumstances — Grave Illness
Under section 14A(2)(a) of the Trial on Indictments (Amendment) Act 1985, grave illness constitutes exceptional circumstances justifying bail for a person accused of murder where the illness cannot be adequately treated in custody, even if a medical certificate from a board constituted by the Chief Medical Officer has not been formally obtained, where the court is satisfied on other evidence that adequate medical treatment is unavailable in prison.
Bail — Assessment of Likelihood of Absconding
In determining whether an accused person is likely to abscond if released on bail, the court considers the accused's previous compliance with bail conditions, fixed place of abode, the credibility and substance of sureties offered, and whether there are other pending charges. Previous compliance with bail conditions over an extended period weighs heavily in favour of granting bail.
Bail — Bail After Committal for Trial
There is no rule of law which precludes the High Court from granting bail to an accused person after committal to the High Court for trial, even where the case has been given a definite date for hearing. The paramount consideration in granting bail is to ensure the accused will turn up for trial, and the court must bear in mind that the law presumes every accused person innocent until proved guilty.

Legislation cited (3)

Cases cited (1)

  • Robert Ntaliko v Uganda (Misc. Criminal Application No. 116 of 1989)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Ndyamijuka Robert v Uganda (Misc. Criminal Application No. 52 of 1992) [1992] UGHC 118 (7 September 1992)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.